I think this question isnt exactly fair because -most- of Ric Flair's title reigns were back in an age when belts didnt change often and runs were much more credible. To be a 16 time world champion back then meant more than what it means now. Edge has alot of reigns but most of the time he was just keeping the belt warm while bigger names recovered from injuries. Will anyone ever be able to capture the same prestige of Ric Flair's title history? Nope. Those days are long gone. Title belts are treated more like props nowadays.
And I hate how WWE doesnt want to acknowledge too many promotions outside of itself. The only reason it acknowledges WCW at all is because WCW actually beat WWF for 80 some straight weeks, causing WWF to have to reinvent how they did things. WWE couldnt ignore WCW, despite how much it wanted to. No other promotion has even remotely come close to what WCW did.
I think holding a world belt in Japan is just as credible if not more so than holding a belt in the WWE. There are tons of guys in Japan who are way better than the likes of Edge and John Cena. Once again its the ego of McMahon thinking that he -IS- wrestling. Ric Flair is actually a 21 time world champ. He has held the top title 21 times across various promotions. Every reign should be counted regardless of whether McMahon's ego acknowledges the existence of the promotions outside of his little fishbowl universe.
The "world" titles in American promotions are mostly contested in America with American wrestlers. Why dont we discredit every WWE title reign since there is no true international promotion in the world. The WWE might travel to other markets but it doesnt dominate those markets. WWE only dominates the North American market and sells well overseas, but it doesnt stay overseas. It just visits. When the WWE leaves Europe, the fans there go back to supporting their local European promotions. When the WWE starts hosting house shows all around the world on a regular basis as much as they tour the states, then I might consider their "world" champions to actually be -world- champions.
Now the WWE has two world belts, the world championship and the WWE championship. Whats more valuable: being champion of the WWE or champion of the world? Does being the WWE champion count as being a world champion? Now there's two belts with equal value in mini promotions within the WWE? It just goes to further prove my point that being champion just means youre the champion of the promotion, not the actual world. So therefore, WWE title reigns are just as meaningful as title reigns in AWA, WCW, ECW, IWGP, TNA, NWA, MCW, and any other promotion no matter how small. When the WWWF was the king of its region, they had a "world" champion, while at the same time, down south, someone else was the "world" champion of their regional promotion. There is no real world champion because there's no real world promotion. Its all a fucking joke. Pro wrestling started as a carnival sideshow; let's not forget that.
As far as just passing the 16 reigns that McMahon's ego recognizes, I think we need to move away from this WWE Universe bullshit propaganda. Theyre not the only major promotion in the world and in fact some of the greatest wrestlers in the world dont even wrestle for the WWE. If someone has held the top title of any major promotion in the world, it should count as part of their legacy.
Considering that the value of title runs keeps getting deflated as the years go on, it will be very easy for someone to pass Flair's record but that doesnt mean that all of their title runs put together will have the prestige of a single Flair reign. A single Flair title reign from back in the day would equal about 3 title reigns in today's age.